Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

The matrix is without a doubt symmetric, ie. the vector geometry is "draw-able" in both directions.Furthermore, this symmetry manifests as a reaction amongst physical bodies both at the periphery and centroid of the field. Reflection is an intermediary reaction, a relay, that takes, well...time, for the mirroring surface electrons to align/deform/oscillate to the field vectors of/toward the centroidal action [eg. an electron "dropping" to a lower quantum state] the vectoral action toward the reflecting surface, eg. at the rod/cones of my retina, also take a smidgen of time, the relay conversion of the vectoral pressure to an electro-chemical impulse. The question I pose [and answer with IAAD] is what is happening in the [mediating] space between retina and mirror, and between mirror to centroid?

Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

webolife wrote:Once this unification is made, the proper centropic vectoring of light toward the source [as a sink], rather than away from it as an emission, leads to the somewhat startling conclusion that light action is a pressure effect that is instantaneous across a distance, ie. the relative radius of the given field. See the IAAD thread for more...

Been cogitating for a while on your centropic light model, and still not getting the mono-directional centropism part. (I’ve discussed reciprocal models with you previously, but don’t remember where now) .

Your assertion that a unification is established between source and detector seems contraverse to the final centripetal vector and inevitable entropy that I think I’ve heard you espouse.

If the light connection is unified (via a “geometric [aetheric?] matrix”, as you’ve stated; then the connection should allow AC oscillation and the possibility of simultaneous, bi-directional conveyance of signal and thus ektropy.Unless your matrix is like a diode, which would then prohibit reflection ?

webolife wrote:The matrix is without a doubt symmetric, ie. the vector geometry is "draw-able" in both directions.Furthermore, this symmetry manifests as a reaction amongst physical bodies both at the periphery and centroid of the field. Reflection is an intermediary reaction, a relay, that takes, well...time, for the mirroring surface electrons to align/deform/oscillate to the field vectors of/toward the centroidal action [eg. an electron "dropping" to a lower quantum state] the vectoral action toward the reflecting surface, eg. at the rod/cones of my retina, also take a smidgen of time, the relay conversion of the vectoral pressure to an electro-chemical impulse. The question I pose [and answer with IAAD] is what is happening in the [mediating] space between retina and mirror, and between mirror to centroid?

Could you perhaps break down into a summary "what is happening" in the 'intermediating space', in terms simple enough to resonate in my rather dense resonant cavity ? thanks.

webolife » Sat Nov 04, 2017 2:45 pmWebbman,What makes you think equilibrium would be a problem with a unified centropic pressure field?If you have read many of my other posts about this, you would see that I frequently refer to Centropy = Entropy, which is simply a statement that matter returns to a net lower energy state in every interaction.

if it was always lower we would be at boring equilibrium right now. Because we aren't there must be some simple mechanism that makes going to equilibrium not result in that. i.e it works against itself creating cycles.

Are you saying that you don't prescribe to the second law of thermodynamics?My own take on the 2nd law is that it results in a dynamic equilibrium in an otherwise very energetic universe, in contrast to the oft alluded to "heat death" of some standard models. If you visualize the universe s a passive place then a net energy loss [entropy] would seem to result in eventual decay-death, I suppose. And if you additionally assume an extreme age for the universe [or tempus in perpetuity] then by now the universe would be, well... quite boring indeed. I personally do not prescribe to either of those "ifs". Light is an example of a process that perpetuates life, while at the same time drawing [rather, nudging] it's partakers ever toward its source-centroid. Centropy=Entropy.

Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

Webolife wrote: Light is an example of a process that perpetuates life, while at the same time drawing [rather, nudging] it's partakers ever toward its source-centroid. Centropy=Entropy.

Not sure to whom you were addressing that last post, but i'll respond.That belief is oft called the 'Moth Theory', where leivers are drawn to the light; and i don't dispute it.However, light (or or any manifestation of the EM radiation continuum) undeniably projects into space.You've seen the experiments where a light beam is used to levitate matter, push on a sail, spin an object or 'tweeze' small particles of matter, right ?Imo, what is radiated by light, eventually comes back via gravity. That is apart from any aetheric matrix connection made (instantly?) between coupled source and receiver/detector.

The previous post was directed toward Webbman, but Seasmith, I'll make of believer of you yet! [Though your thoughtful consideration of these ideas is my primary objective ] Seasmith said: "Undeniably projects into space...""undeniably" --- strong word for a science forum, however..."projects" --- if you mean "radiates" then I am with you 100%, but..."into" suggests being emitted from the source/centroid. My radiation is in all cases toward the centroid, so it doesn't have to "return" as gravitation, but is itself a different manifestation of gravitation; then... "space" --- directs us back to the IAAD thread

Check your levitation...where is the light source with respect to the levitated object? Again, when light "pushes" a sail, where is the light source and in which direction is the sail moving [compare to a radiometer]? And in the case of "tweezing", the light source is reflected by surfaces which also vector the objects toward the light source.

And the "matrix connection" is by no means apart from this discussion, except in the fact that this thread and the IAAD thread are not merged. Nor imo should they be just yet... I am interested in readers providing additional phenomena or attributes of "extraordinary light" which challenge being explained as quite ordinary by the CPFT [Centropic Light Field Theory].

Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

I can tell you that the net effect of the theoretical diagram if CPFT is applied is to reverse the direction of the blue "momentum" arrows, otherwise the pressure effect remains; I think of light "impulse" rather than momentum. Universal pressure applies inertia to the surface with the reactive impulse being in the opposite direction of the light source and the surface has a net impulse [this diagram labels it as momentum change] in the direction of the local light source. Remember that for me, light is not comprised of moving stuff.

Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

Webbman wrote:if light were a helix type spring structure its momentum could be maintained at the cost of its wavelength or contained energy.

"Helix" is evidentially in the beam structure, given max/min angle-of-incidence effects on an ideal sail;and if there Is inherent oscillation in a beam then the "spring" analogy resonates as well, although probably with a different associated vector/versor than for the screw or 'auger' moment?

Note that the force and acceleration approach zero generally around θ = 60° rather than 90° as one might expect with an ideal sail.[18]

webolife wrote: My radiation is in all cases toward the centroid, so it doesn't have to "return" as gravitation, but is itself a different manifestation of gravitation; then... CPFT [Centropic Light Field Theory].

You are calling Light a direct manifestation of Gravity ? That is the fundamental basis of CPFT ?? Are Aether and Matter and Goldfish also then manifestations of Gravity?

Seasmith,I use the word "gravitation" as a "verb", ie. a process, not a thing per se, but more importantly gravitation is a manifestation of the CPF. In this sense we are talking about the universally observed tendency of matter to congeal, amalgomate, condense, "drop", lose "potential energy", what-goes-up-must-come-down, "jump to a lower energy level", vector toward "ground", amass, locally increase mass or sustain mass, gravitate, increase entropy, all different ways of discussing "centropy", the action of the centropic pressure field [CPF]. The distinctiveness of mentioning these things on a thread titled "extraordinary light" is that I include light action as a [not-so-extra]ordinary manifestation of this same universal CPF. Light in the CPFT [theory] is vectored toward its "source" as a sink, necessitating, perhaps to the point of obviating IAAD, hence my simultaneous discussion of it on that thread as well. As for the goldfish, and all other living things, I appeal to the second rule in the CPF universe; the rule of Primal Energy, showing up in measurements of motion, angular[melding the CPF to Newton's first law] momentum, kinetic energy, "energy" in general, and its most "extraordinary" manifestation, LIFE. Energy and the CPF, dynamic equilibrium.

Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

It is interesting to consider the 60deg vs. 90deg observation, as that is like the case with light spectra elicited via a pinhole or slit device. The multiple spectral orders [redundant spectra, or supernumeraries attributed by standard physicists a la Thomas Young to wave diffraction/interference] project to a 30deg spread with respect to the central line of sight, after which the vector field becomes null. In the geometry of light pressure field vectors, this represents a limiting "reflected" angle of 120deg, while by comparison gravitation and other mechanical force vectors nullify at 45deg/90deg. Aaiieehh!! I wish I knew how to incl drawn diagrams here for reference and clarity...

Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

webolife wrote:Seasmith,I use the word "gravitation" as a "verb", ie. a process, not a thing per se,---Sorry, i initially missed the distinction, and it is certainly a valid one.

but more importantly gravitation is a manifestation of the CPF. In this sense we are talking about the universally observed tendency of matter to congeal, amalgomate, condense, "drop", lose "potential energy", what-goes-up-must-come-down, "jump to a lower energy level", vector toward "ground", amass, locally increase mass or sustain mass, gravitate, increase entropy, all different ways of discussing "centropy", the action of the centropic pressure field [CPF].

---I think i follow that description.

The distinctiveness of mentioning these things on a thread titled "extraordinary light" is that I include light action as a [not-so-extra]ordinary manifestation of this same universal CPF. Light in the CPFT [theory] is vectored toward its "source" as a sink, necessitating, perhaps to the point of obviating IAAD, hence my simultaneous discussion of it on that thread as well. ...Energy and the CPF, dynamic equilibrium.

---OK, now in summary you have filled in the Yang to equilibrate (verb) with the Yin (CPF). I guess what i keep foundering on is your equivalence of the fundamental energetic state of Light with a centropic, grounding vector in your master matrix, and in the next breath declare it pure "radiation".Is it your contention then that all things manifest in our cosmos are CPF, and that all else is then 'implicit', for lack of a better adjective, "Energy" ??

[For context, as you have no-doubt discerned, i consider light, aether, gravity and matter as the fundamental four cardinal 'energetic states']

As for the goldfish, and all other living things, I appeal to the second rule in the CPF universe; the rule of Primal Energy, showing up in measurements of motion, angular[melding the CPF to Newton's first law] momentum, kinetic energy, "energy" in general, and its most "extraordinary" manifestation, LIFE. .

I know nothing of goldfish, but if the merry-go-round is spinning clockwise, the gear driving it is spinning in the opposite direction

webolife » Mon Dec 11, 2017 2:19 amIt is interesting to consider the 60deg vs. 90deg observation, as that is like the case with light spectra elicited via a pinhole or slit device. The multiple spectral orders [redundant spectra, or supernumeraries attributed by standard physicists a la Thomas Young to wave diffraction/interference] project to a 30deg spread with respect to the central line of sight, after which the vector field becomes null. In the geometry of light pressure field vectors, this represents a limiting "reflected" angle of 120deg, while by comparison gravitation and other mechanical force vectors nullify at 45deg/90deg. Aaiieehh!! I wish I knew how to incl drawn diagrams here for reference and clarity...

Not sure what you are referring to there with the 30 degree ref. I caint drawl a bucket of water, but have seen folks sketch up something in MS Draw or a similar app, then paste it in with the TB forum "attachment" tool ...

there is a reason as to why a drill or augur or other helical style shape is the best for going through things.

I believe this is just as relevant for electromagnetics and the only real question is whether the structures are open or closed loops, as I think both might exist. Closed loops at the small end and open loops at the large end. The equilibrium point being somewhere in the infrared band where both types would be seen.

I need more on your augur and open/closed loops combining in the infrared.Also about aether being an energetic state.Will reply once I understand it better...maybe.

Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.